cdm attachment

A0-5

AT TAC H M E N T S

IMPLEMENTATION CHECKLIST: A0-1

ATTACHMENT 1: Airport CDM Objectives and Key Performance Indicators A1-1

ATTACHMENT 1.1 Introduction - References A1-1

ATTACHMENT 1.2 Generic Legend A1-2

ATTACHMENT 1.3 Generic Performance Indicators A1-3

ATTACHMENT 1.4 Airport Operations Objectives and Performance Indicators A1-7

ATTACHMENT 1.5 AO / GH Objectives and Performance Indicators A1-12

ATTACHMENT 1.6 Local ATC Objectives and Performance Indicators A1-20

ATTACHMENT 1.7 CFMU Objectives and Performance Indicators A1-23

ATTACHMENT 1.8 Guidelines for Selecting KPIs from the List A1-25

ATTACHMENT 1.9 Sample of Data Analysis from a CDM Airport A1-29

ATTACHMENT 2: Procedures A2-1

ATTACHMENT 2.1 Generic Airport CDM Implementation Procedures A2-1

ATTACHMENT 2.2 Examples of Airport CDM Implementation Procedures to be inserted

ATTACHMENT 3: Sample Documents A3-1

ATTACHMENT 3.1 Sample Airport CDM MoU A3-1

ATTACHMENT 3.1.1 Overview A3-1

ATTACHMENT 3.1.2 Scope A3-1

ATTACHMENT 3.1.3 MoU & Confidentiality Agreements A3-1

• Why

• Who

• What

• Guidelines

ATTACHMENT 3.1.4 Generic MoU A3-5

ATTACHMENT 3.1.5 Sample MoU 1 (Airport XXX) to be inserted

ATTACHMENT 3.1.6 Sample MoU 2 (Airport YYY) to be inserted

ATTACHMENT 3.2 Airport CDM Implementation Inventory & A3-13

Compliance Checklist

ATTACHMENT 3.2.1 Introduction A3-13

ATTACHMENT 3.2.2 Blank Inventory & Compliance Checklist according to

Airport CDM Implementation Manual A3-14

ATTACHMENT 3.2.3 Sample Inventory & Compliance Checklist from

Budapest Ferihegy airport A3-19

ATTACHMENT 4: References and Contacts A4-1

ATTACHMENT 5: Raising Local Airport CDM Awareness A5-0

ATTACHMENT 5.1 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from Barcelona Airport A5-1

ATTACHMENT 5.2 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from Brussels Airport A5-3

ATTACHMENT 5.3 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from London (LHR) Airport A5-5

ATTACHMENT 5.4 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from Munich Airport A5-7

ATTACHMENT 5.5 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from Stockholm Airport A5-9

ATTACHMENT 6: Blank to be inserted

A0-6

A1-1

AT TAC H M E N T 1 AIRPORT CDM OBJECTIVES & KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

This document describes the Objectives and

related Performance Indicators for implementa-

tion of CDM processes and supporting functions

at airports. The document is based on the expe-

riences gained at the initial set of trial airports

and will be updated, as the trials and functions

mature.

The Objectives and related Performance

Indicators included in this document are divided

as follows:

� Global target objectives and Generic

Performance Indicators, applicable to all air-

port partners and corresponding to the four

(4) main areas identified by EATM, i.e.

Efficiency, Environment, Capacity, Safety

� Specific improvement Objectives and Perfor-

mance Indicators defined for each airport part-

ner, incl. CFMU. Each specific objective is linked

to at least one generic objective

The Global Objective of aircraft operators is to

meet their planned schedule. The major impact

of delays on aircraft operators is additional costs

(extra fuel, missed connections and subsequent

knock-on effects incurred).

Ground Handlers' objectives are to maximise

their resource management and maintain servi-

ce level agreements (incl. departure punctuality

and turn-round times). The best use of available

resources depends partly on the quality of arrival

and departure estimates.

The objective of airport operators is to maximise

the throughput and efficiency whilst complying

with their operational plan. The major impacts of

delays on airport operators are mainly the loss of

image / reputation and a sub-optimum usage of

airport resources

(e.g. manpower, equipment) and infrastructure

(e.g. stands, gates). On the other hand, both

departure and arrival punctuality is the founda-

tion for efficient operations, leading to a possible

reduction or delay of new infrastructure invest-

ment.

ATSP Global Objectives at airports are to ensure

safety whilst making the best use of the

available infrastructure (runways and taxiways).

CFMU objectives are "to protect air traffic ser-

vices from overloading while at the same time

enabling aircraft operators to carry out their

flight operations as planned with the minimum

penalty. This is achieved by making best use of

the available air traffic control and airport capaci-

ties".

In addition, a Generic Legend is provided, clari-

fying the terms:

� Strategic Objective

� Strategic Performance Driver (only applicable

for the Generic Performance Indicators)

� Performance Driver

� Performance Indicator

� Performance Measurement

� Airport CDM Contribution

The set of performance indicators included in

this document has been derived from the

jointly defined objectives. Achieved improve-

ments shall be measured by comparing the

status of the performance indicators "before

and after" airport CDM operations. Such mea-

surements shall be monitored continuously, in

order to improve the quality of service.

Additionally, the achieved improvements mea-

sured will feed into the Cost Benefit Analysis

(CBA) performed by each airport partner.

1 .1 INTRODUCTION – REFERENCES

INTROD U C T I O N

A1-2

1.2 GENERIC LEGEND

Strategic ObjectiveThis is what we want to achieve

Performance Indicator

This is what we get from the measurement.

Perf. Indicator is an index, is the result of a mathematical

equation between 2 measurable quantities.

The incr. / decr. Trend of this index is our KPI.

� PI1

� PI2

� PI3

� PI4

� PI5

Airport CDM ContributionThis is how Airport CDM can facilitate the achievement of the strategic objective

Performance Measurement

This is how we measure each indicator.

Perf. Measurement is just the measuring method.

� M1

� M2

� M3

� M4

� M5

Performance Driver

This is how we can achieve our objective.

Perf. Driver is a verb.

� D1

� D2

� D3

� D4

� D5

Strategic Performance DriverThis is the means of reaching the strategic objective

AT TAC H M E N T 1 AIRPORT CDM OBJECTIVES & KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (CONT ’D)

1.3 GENERIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

� E f f i c i e n c y

Strategic Objective

Increase airport EFFICIENCY


� Turn-round compliance

� EIBT predictability

� TOBT/TSAT PredictabilityAOBT

� READY reaction time

� Average delay of ARR flights� Arrival punctuality index� Delay recovery ratio ARR

� Average delay of DEP flights� Departure punctuality index� Delay recovery ratio DEP

(index per airline, per a/d of origin & destination)

Airport CDM Contribution

� ALL Airport CDM functions


� Measure ATTT � Check against schedule,

comparing MTTT to ATTT (turn-round compliance)

� Measure EIBT accuracy vs.time (timeliness)

� Compare TOBT/TSAT to AOBT

� Measure READY reaction time = a/c stand holding time (AOBT - ARDT)

� Compare AIBT to airport scheduled data (SIBT)

� Measure minutes delay per delayed movement

� Measure percentage of flights delayed

� Compare AOBT to airport scheduled data (SOBT)

� Measure minutes delay per delayed movement

� Measure percentage of flights delayed

Performance Driver

� Optimise the Turn-round time predictability

� Improve the arrival predictability

� Improve the departure predictability

� Reduce airlines / Ground handlers / ATSP reaction times

� Reduce average delay of ARR flights

� Reduce average delay of DEP flights

Strategic Performance Driver

Improve punctuality and reduce delays

A1-3


A1-4

� E nv i r o n m e n t

Strategic Objective

Reduce ENVIRONMENTAL nuisance


� Noise on ground (Ground engine time ARR & DEP phase)

� Emission from engines on ground


� Measure taxi-in and taxi-out times

Performance Driver

� Reduce noise on ground

� Reduce emission from engines on ground


Reduce engine time


Airport CDM� Information Sharing� Predeparture Sequence� Variable Taxi-Time Calculation

A1-5

� C a p a c i t y

Strategic Objective

Optimise the use of available CAPACITY


� Airport declared capacity

� Actual DEP & ARR rate




� Compare the actual num-ber of movements per houragainst the declared airportcapacity for all runwayconfigurations

Performance Driver

� Fill the gap between theactual operational capacity and the declared capacity


Increase airport efficiency

� S a f e t y

Strategic Objective

Improve SAFETY by reducing apron and taxiway congestion


� Number of silent coordina-tions introduced by CDM procedures

� Number of a/c queuing on sequence

� Number of incidents


� Measure the number ofsilent coordinations intro-duced by CDM procedures

� Measure the number of a/c queuing on sequence

� Measure the number of incidents

Performance Driver

� Reduce frequency over-load

� Reduce number of a/c moving simultaneouslyon the manoeuvring area

� Reduce number of incidents on the apron


Reduce number of incidents on the movement area

Note

Safety Impact on Airport OperationsAirport-wide CDM functions will improve the predictability and reduce the number of last minutechanges. As a result, the number of km run by GH (Ground Handlers) vehicles (especially in a hurry)will be reduced, resulting in a reduction of the accident risk on the apron.


Airport CDM� Information Sharing� Turn-round Process� Predeparture Sequence

A1-6


1.4 AIRPORT OPERATIONS OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

� I n f ra s t r u c t u r e

Strategic Objective

Improve the usage of infrastructure


� Overall stands' actual elapsed occupation time

� Contact stands' actual elapsed occupation time

� Boarding gates’ actual elapsed occupation time

� Baggage reclaim belts'actual elapsed occupationtime

� A/c stand and pax gates freezing time


Airport CDM� Information Sharing� Turn-round Process


� Compare the overall stands' actual elapsed occupation time with scheduled elapsed occupation time

� Compare the contactstands' actual elapsedoccupation time with scheduled elapsed occupation time

� Compare the boardinggates’ actual elapsed occu-pation time with scheduledelapsed occupation time

� Compare the baggagereclaim belts' actual elapsed occupation timewith scheduled elapsed occupation time

� Compare first / last bag delivery to SLA

Performance Driver

� Optimise the overallusage of a/c stands(contact and remotestands)

� Optimise the usage of contact stands

� Optimise the usage of boarding gates (contactand coaching)

� Optimise the usage of baggage reclaim belts

� Reduce last minute stand& gate changes

A1-7


� D a t a Q u a l i t y

Strategic Objective

Improve public information data quality


� Arrival time accuracy

� Departure time accuracy


� Airport CDM Information Sharing


� Compare EIBT, AIBTand SIBT

� Compare EOBT, SOBTand AOBT

Performance Driver

� Provide public with accurate and timely arrival and departure data(both on FIDS and internet)

A1-8

A1-9

� A i r c ra f t S t a n d a n d G a t e C h a n g e s

Strategic Objective

Reduce late a/c stand and gate changes


� Aircraft stand & pax gatefreezing time

� TOBT/TSAT accuracy

� Stand allocation accuracy


Airport CDM� Information Sharing� Turn-round Process� Variable Taxi Time Calculation


� Number of a/c stand changes within e.g.[(ALDT-10 minutes) toALDT]

� Number of a/c stand changes after landing[ALDT to AIBT]

� Number of pax gatechanges within (value TBDlocally)

� Number of a/c having towait for a vacant stand(and waiting time per a/c)

� TOBT/TSAT accuracy =AOBT - TOBT/TSAT

Compare � EOBT vs AOBT� EIBT vs AIBT

Performance Driver

� Reduce the number oflate a/c stand changes (e.g. 10 minutes before landing time or evenafter touchdown)

� Reduce the number of multiple allocation of a/c parking stands and boar-ding gates

� Reduce the number oflate pax gate changes

� Reduce number of a/c having to wait for avacant stand

� Increase TOBT/TSATaccuracy

INTROD U C T I O N

fdsfsdfsdsdfsdfs

� A i r p o r t S l o t

Strategic Objective

Adhere to airport slot*


� Airport slot adherence


Airport CDM� Information Sharing� Turn-round Process� Variable Taxi Time Calculation


� Compare AIBT to SIBT

� Compare AOBT to SOBT

Performance Driver

� Improve airport slot adherence

* Airport slot as per EC Directive 793/2004

A1-10


A1-11

� O p e ra t i o n a l S t a f f I nvo l ve m e n t

Strategic Objective

Improve operational staff involvement


� Number of employees trained

� Number of training sessions

� Number of improvement proposals presented by employees

� Number of system evalua-tion meetings

� Number of proposalsaccepted

� Number of procedure changes

� System reaction times to manual inputs




Measure the:� Number of employees

trained� Number of training

sessions


� Number of system evalua-tion meetings

� Number of proposalsaccepted


� Measure the system reaction times to manualinputs

Performance Driver

� Increase awareness among airportoperational staff

� Ensure their commitmentand active participation

� Improve system reaction time

INTROD U C T I O N

fdsfsdfsdsdfsdfs

� P r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f O p e ra t i o n s

Strategic Objective

Improve predictability of operations


� Compare TOBT/TSATto AOBT

� a/c utilisation rate




� TOBT/TSAT� AOBT

� Hours per airframe (per day)� Additional a/c rotations

Performance Driver

� Enhance a/c fleet utilisation and flexibility

1 .5 AIRCRAFT OPERATORS' / GROUND HANDLERS’ / SER VICE PROVIDERS' OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

A1-12


Note - “Improved predictability of air transport would generate high added-value: compressing half of flight schedules by 5 minutes

on average would be worth some �1,000M per annum in better use of airline and airport resources.”

CESC/05/AH2/2 - 14/01/2005 - DRAFT FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF EIGHTH PERFORMANCE REVIEW REPORT (PRR 8)

Note — When the word "message" is used as a suffix to this term, it denotes the content andformat of the filed flight plan data as transmitted.

A1-13

� D e l ays d u e t o L a t e A r r i va l o f I n b o u n d Fl i g h t

Strategic Objective

Minimise the impact of delays due to late arrival of inbound flight


� Difference betweeninbound flight delay andoutbound flight delay




� Inbound flight delay

� Outbound flight delay

� Turn-round times

Performance Driver

� Negotiate best possiblea/c stand and resource allocation for delayedflight

INTROD U C T I O N

fdsfsdfsdsdfsdfs

� A i r l i n e R e s o u r ce M a n a g e m e n t

Strategic Objective

Improve airline resource management


� Delays due to late personnel (flight crew,maintenance staff etc)

� Delays due to late equipment




� Measure contributingdelays, based on IATA standard delay coding

Performance Driver

� Reduce delays due tolate personnel (flightcrew, maintenance staffetc) and equipment

A1-14


A1-15

� G H R e s o u r ce M a n a g e m e n t

Strategic Objective

Improve GH resource management


� Delays due to late equip-ment (e.g. buses, push-backtractors, steps, etc)

� Delays due to late personnel

;




� Measure contributingdelays, based on IATA standard delay coding

Performance Driver

� Reduce delays due tolate equipment (e.g.buses, push back tractors,steps etc) and personnel

INTROD U C T I O N

� Tu r n - r o u n d T i m e

Strategic Objective

Optimise turn-round time


� Compliance with the ETTT




� Measure turn-round times (ATTT)

� Check against estimate on the actual day of operations (ETTT)

� Measure gaps betweenETTT and ATTT (=AIBT toARDT)

� Measure number ofMilestone alarms

Performance Driver

� Turn-round complianceto agreed SLA

� Improve Turn-round predictability

A1-16


A1-17

� Fu e l l i n g S e r v i ce s a n d R e l a t e d D e l ays

Strategic Objective

Reduce delays related to fuelling services


� Elapsed time between fuelling truck's arrival toparking and aircraft arrivalto parking (AIBT)

� Elapsed time between airlines' and handlers' fuel-ling request and the aircraftarrival to parking (AIBT)

� Delays due to fuelling services

� Impact on TOBT - delaysdue to fuelling




� Measure timeliness of airlines and handlers' fuelling requests

� Measure contributingdelays due to fuelling services, based on IATAstandard delay coding

� Measure impact on TOBT of delays due to fuelling

Performance Driver

� Optimise quality and accuracy of information provided to the fuelling services i.e. EOST, TOBT,a/c stand location

� Reduce delays due to fuelling

� Optimise prioritisation given by airline / GH to fuelling services

INTROD U C T I O N

fdsfsdfsdsdfsdfs

� D e - I c i n g S e r v i ce s a n d R e l a t e d D e l ays

Strategic Objective

Reduce delays related to de-icing services


� Delays due to de-icing services

� Impact on TOBT - delaysdue to de-icing




� Measure contributingdelays due to de-icing services, based on IATAstandard delay coding

� Measure impact on TOBT of delays due to de-icing

Performance Driver

� Optimise quality and accuracy of information provided to the de-icing services i.e. EOST, TOBT, a/c stand or de-icing bay location

� Reduce delays due to de-icing

� Optimise prioritisation given by airport / airline /GH to de-icing services

A1-18


A1-19


Strategic Objective






� Number of system evaluation meetings

� Number of proposals accepted







trained � Number of training sessions





� Measure the system reaction times to manual inputs

Performance Driver

� Increase awarenessamong airline / groundhandling staff



INTROD U C T I O N

fdsfsdfsdsdfsdfs

� R u n w ay Th r o u g h p u t

Strategic Objective

Increase and optimise the runway throughput


Compare:� the actual number of

movements per houragainst the declared runway capacity for eachRWY configuration

� the actual number ofdepartures per day againstthe number of airport slotsper day

� the actual number of departures per hour / day / week etc against the actual demand for each RWY configuration

� the actual demand perhour / day against thedeclared capacity for eachRWY configuration

� Number of refused TOBT(not compliant with CTOT)

� Percentage of missed slots (departing outside CTOT window)

� Compare CFMU slot to airport slot


� All Airport CDM functions


� RWY declared capacity (foreach RWY configuration)

� Actual DEP rate

� Actual ARR rate

� Number of TOBT not compliant with CTOT

� Number of flights depar-ting outside assigned CTOT

� Number of flights depar-ting outside airport slot

Performance Driver

� Fill the gap between the actual operational capacity and the declared capacity for allRWY configurations

� Slot compliance

1 .6 LOCAL ATC OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

A1-20


A1-21

� Ta ke - O f f S e q u e n ce a n d D e p a r t u r e Fl ow

Strategic Objective

Optimise take-off sequence (queuing) and departure flow by using Variable Taxi Times


Compare� ASAT to TSAT� AXOT to EXOT� ATOT to TTOT

� Clearance delivery reaction time


� All Airport CDM functions


� Actual Taxi Time vs Default Taxi Time

� ASAT vs TSAT� AXOT vs EXOT� ATOT vs TTOT

� Measure the reaction time between request and delivery clearance

Performance Driver

� Optimise DEP sequence and the departure queue(on apron, TWYs and holding areas)

(using the a/c wake vortex categories, the SID sequen-cing - TMA exit point - andCFMU slot)

� Reduce delays due to taxiout time by smoothing DEP flowduring peak hours

INTROD U C T I O N


Strategic Objective














trained � Number of training sessions





� Measure the system reaction times to manualinputs

Performance Driver

� Increase awarenessamong ATC staff



A1-22


� AT F M M e a s u r e s ( C TOT )

Strategic Objective

Compliance to ATFM measures (CTOT)


� CTOT Compliance


� ALL Airport CDM functions� CFMU - Airport CDM Information Sharing


� Compare CTOT with ATOTfor regulated flights (-5’/+10’)

� Compare EOBT with [ATOT (-0’/+15’)+Taxi time] for non-regulated flights

� Measure percentage of missed slots (flights depar-ting outside CTOT window)

Performance Driver

� Increase percentage of flights departing between CTOT–5’ andCTOT+10’

1 .7 CFMU OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

A1-23

INTROD U C T I O N

� Pu n c t u a l i t y

Strategic Objective

Improve punctuality


� DPI Accuracy

� DPI Stability


� ALL Airport CDM Functions � CFMU - Airport CDM Information Sharing (DPI Implementation)


� Compare ETOT(at defined times prior to take off ) vs ATOT

� Compare TTOT vs ATOT

� Count DPI msg by type forDEP flights

� Measure time between last msg and ATOT for each type of DPI

Performance Driver

� Improve TOT Accuracy

� Improve TOT Stability

A1-24


A1-25

1.8 GUIDELINES FOR SELECTING AIRPORTCDM KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORSFROM THE L IST

� I n t r o d u c t i o n

In order to measure the improvements brought

about by Airport Collaborative Decision Making

(CDM), it is essential to have a baseline against

which the improvements can be evaluated. The

baseline must be established using the same key

performance indicators (KPIs) which will be

applied later in the evaluation.

In line with the complex nature of airport

operations, many types of KPIs may be identified.

However, getting agreement among the partners

on which performance indicator to use is not

always easy, especially if there are too many to

choose from.

Experience in other performance based

services shows that measuring with too high gra-

nularity is counter productive, in fact making the

results less reliable. This is due to the complex

relationships between the indicators and the

consequent difficulty in establishing the wei-

ghing rules and factors.

It is therefore recommended to select and

agree a limited set of KPIs, which however are

strongly representative of the most important

aspects of Airport CDM, covering the operations

of all partners.

A1-26


� S e l e c t i n g t h ei n d i c a t o r s

It is best to select indicators which are already

recorded and archived on a routine basis. It is

also perfectly acceptable to use indicators which

are already being utilised to measure performan-

ce in other contexts. Their inclusion in the Airport

CDM performance measurement framework will

only enhance their significance.

Airport CDM performance is best measured

along two main axes. On the one hand, the quali-

ty of data on which decisions are based and on

the other the accuracy of the estimates about

the operations affected by the decisions.

In practice, the following three indicator

categories should be considered

� Availability (of data)

� Accuracy and timeliness (of data)

� Accuracy (of the estimates)

Properly implemented Airport CDM does have

substantial network benefits as CDM airports

interact and the improvements enhance

each other. Nevertheless, the performance indi-

cators and measurements established at a given

airport should only be used to show the situation

at the given airport and NOT to compare one air-

port to another. While the indicators may be

identical at different airports, their changes and

significance taken together says a lot about that

airport but are not suitable for direct comparison

between airports.

� Pr e s e n t i n g t h e r e s u l t s

It is essential that the results of the data

collection and analysis are presented in a

graphical format that facilitates visualisation not

only of the actual data but also of the all impor-

tant trends.

A pie chart is an excellent tool to show the

percentage of flights where the ALDT was spot

on, within 1 minute and outside 1 minute. For

trends, line and bar charts are essential.

The accuracy of estimates can best be shown on

scatter graphs and error distribution histograms.

There is no such thing as the best presentation.

Each organisation and even each person charged

with creating a presentation will have their own

style and favourite methods for

showing complex data relationships. The impor-

tant consideration is to use graphics that are

simple and to the point and also to stick with an

agreed methodology to ensure easy comparison

of the results over time.

A1-27

� I n d i c a t o r si n d e t a i l

Availability of data

The following list contains the data that has to be

checked at the various partners for availability.

Airport CDM effectiveness is impacted if any are

missing.

It is recommended to use a tabular presentation

and possibly colour coding to identify data cate-

gories and their status. Colour coding helps in

the at-a-glance evaluation of the results.

Not time related data:

� Correlation airport schedule vs. flight plan� Checking flight plan vs. airport data base� Stand information� Link between inbound and outbound

flights� Runway in use (take off, landing)

Standard Instrument Departure (SID)

Time related data:

� CTOT� ATOT at outstation� FIR Entry� ELDT, ALDT� EIBT, AIBT� EOBT,TOBT, TSAT, AOBT� ETOT, TTOT, ATOT

Aircraft operational status:

� Scheduled� Initiated� Airborne� In destination FIR� On final approach� Landed� In-block� Boarding� Ready� Off-block� Departed� Cancelled

Variable Taxi Time Calculation:

� EXIT, EXOT

Alarms:

� Unauthorised source� Airport schedule/flight plan correlation

failure� Missing flight plan� Flight plan already correlated� Inbound/outbound flight correlation

failure� EOBT compliance� TOBT compliance� CTOT compliance� Boarding� Airborne� CFMU error� ATFM regulation cancellation� Flight schedule cancellation� Flight plan cancellation� Flight suspension� Flight de-suspension

A1-28


Accuracy and timeliness of data,accuracy of estimates

Evaluate the accuracy and timeliness of the follo-

wing data to establish data quality and improve-

ments thereto.

One of the most important improvements to be

brought by Airport CDM is more accurate estima-

ted take off times (ETOT). Take off time estimates

should therefore be evaluated at various times

prior to take off and take off times calculated

using default taxi times and variable taxi times

should be compared.

ELDTCompare estimates with ALDT at time hori-zons of 3 hrs, 2 hrs, 30 mins prior to landing

ALDTCheck accuracy of ALDT within 1 min of actualand display within 1min of event

EIBTConnected to ELDT plus VTT. Use same para-meters as ELDT and evaluate taxi-in time accu-racy

AIBTUse same parameters as ALDT

EOBT / TOBT / TSATUse same parameters as ELDT and comparewith AOBT

AOBTUse same parameters as ALDT

ETOT = EOBT+ default taxi time

ETOT = EOBT+ EXOT

TTOT = TOBT+ default taxi time

TTOT = TOBT+ EXOT

TTOT = TSAT + default taxi time

TTOT = TSAT + EXOT

TTOT = AOBT+ default taxi time

TTOT = AOBT+ EXOT

ATOT - Check accuracy of ATOT within 1 minof actual and display within 1min of event

Measurements must also focus on the accuracy

of arrival and departure estimates, compliance

with MTTT and compliance with CTOT.

Arrival� Compare SIBT with AIBT. Record percentage

of on-time, within 15 mins and within 60 mins

Departure� Compare SOBT with AOBT. Record percen-

tage of on-time, within 15 mins and within 60 mins

STTT compliance� Compare MTTT (SOBT-SIBT) and ATTT

(AOBT-AIBT)

Regulated flights� Compare CTOT with ATOT (must be

within limits set by the CFMU currently -5/+10 mins)

Non-regulated flights� Compare EOBT (-0/+15 mins) + taxi time

with ATOT

A1-29

1.9 SAMPLE OF DATA ANALYSIS PERFORMEDAT A CDM AIRPORT

� I n t r o d u c t i o n

The objective of such a study is a detailed

analysis of the recorded data over a given period

of time and an evaluation of the Airport CDM

warnings.

Analysis of the recorded data, especially the

timing of warnings, will provide facts to demons-

trate how Airport CDM can be a catalyst to achie-

ving improved predictability, one of the most

important benefits of Airport CDM.

The analysis is done in two steps.

Step 1 – Analysis of Local Data, in order to

examine if the Airport CDM process has given

early indication / warning (and if yes, how early)

for delayed flights.

Step 2 – Comparison of CFMU Data to Local Data,

in order to collect evidence of local and network

benefits.

This sample is based on the “CDM Tool” develo-

ped and used at Athens Airport, Greece.

THE SAMPLE OF DATA ANALYSIS IS AN EXTRACT

OF THE DATA ANALYSIS PERFORMED IN ATHENS

AIRPORT DURING THE OLYMPIC GAMES 2004.

THE FULL DOCUMENT IS TO BE FOUND ON THE

AIRPORT CDM WEB SITE (www.euro-cdm.org).

FOR THE SAKE OF CONSISTENCY, FIGURE AND

TABLE NUMBERS IN THIS SAMPLE ARE IDENTICAL

TO THOSE IN THE SOURCE DOCUMENT.

A1-30


Data element

Definition Source Remark

Localdata

AOBT Actual Off-Block Time CDM TOOL

SOBT Scheduled Off-Block Time CDM TOOL

TOBT Target Off-Block Time CDM TOOL calculation

MTTT Minimum Turn-round TimeFixed value per type of

a/c – table in CDM TOOLLocally agreed

value(s)

ATTTActual Turn-round Time =

= AOBT - AIBTCDM TOOL

TFWTimestamp of issue of

the First Warning

CDM TOOL (both for the First Warning

calculation and for thetimestamp recording)

Definition ofwarnings accordingto the Airport CDM

ImplementationManual

Date Day/month/year CDM TOOL

Actual Delay AOBT - SOBT Calculation during the analysis

EXOT Estimated Taxi-Out Time CDM TOOLDefault or (prefera-bly) variable value

AXOTActual Taxi-Out Time =

= ATOT - AOBTCDM TOOL

CFMUdata

CTOT Calculated Take Off Time CFMU data set

TDLATimestamp of receipt by

CFMU of the first DLA msgCFMU data set

Date Day/month/year CFMU data set

Definition of data elements

A1-31

Input Data elements used:subsets of total number of departing flights, defined by thefollowing selection criterion:

daily total number of departures with an actual delay[AD = AOBT – SOBT] within one of the following ranges:

05<AD<30 min30<AD<60 min60<AD<90 min90<AD<120 min

Actual value of TFW for each departing flight.

Process For each and every flight of each subset:■ extract TFW and SOBT■ calculate the difference: TFW- SOBT (in hours)■ classify the result in one of the following ranges:

TFW < 1 hour1 < TFW < 2.5 hours2.5 < TFW < 5 hours5 < TFW < 11 hours11 < TFW

■ calculate the corresponding percentages for each subset ofdeparting flights

Output Examples: Figure 3-B, Table 1-B

� A n a l ys i s o f l o c a l d a t a

Distribution of CDM first warnings

A1-32


First Warning DistributionStatistics

Delay 5 - 30 mins

Example - Figure 3-B:

First warning for flights with a delay < 30 min

From all the delayed flights with an actual delay

between 5-30 minutes, there was a CDM First

Warning between 1 to 5 hours in advance for

69.9% (= 34.9 + 35.0) of them.

For an additional 4.3%, there was an advance

warning up to 1 hour before actual departure.

Example - Table 1-B:

Distribution of First Warning

Predictability Benefit

From all the delayed flights with an actual

delay between 5 – 90 minutes, there was a

CDM First Warning between 1 to 5 hours

in advance for a significant percentage of

them, ranging between 69.9% and 77.5%.

Furthermore, for an additional percentage

of flights there was an advance warning

up to 1 hour before actual departure.

First

Warning

Period

(hrs)

Actual Delay category

(min)

5-30 30-60 60-90 90-120

1<TFW<5 69.9% 77.5% 75.9% 43.8%

�

1 - 2.5 hrs34.9%

2.5 - 5 hrs35%

5 - 11 hrs2.8%

under 60 mins4.3%

over 11 hrs23%

A1-33

Input Data elements used:subset of total number of departing flights, defined by thefollowing selection criterion:

daily total number of departures with an actual delay[AD = AOBT – SOBT] within the following ranges:

05<AD<30 min30<AD<60 min60<AD<90 min90<AD<120 min

Actual value of AOBT, SOBT, TOBT for each depart flight

Process For each and every flight of each subset:

■ calculate the difference: AOBT - SOBT (in minutes) ■ calculate the difference: AOBT - TOBT (in minutes)

OutputExamine if the following statements are proven by the results:

■ A basic CDM Tool provides a system calculated TOBT more reliable than the SOBT.

■ Even without an established TOBT procedure for AO/GH inputs, the system calculated TOBT is the closest available value to the AOBT.

■ An operational TOBT procedure and the implementation of variable taxi times calculation will significantly improve the accuracy of the TOBT.

Evaluation of TOBT quality for delayed flights

� Conclusions from the sample study

By reviewing Figures 3 - 6 and the consolidated results in Table 1, the following conclusions

can be drawn:

■ Even a basic CDM Tool provides reliable warnings for a significant percentage of delayed

flights – higher than 75 %.

■ These warnings are available in the period 60-90 min prior to EOBT.

■ With such advanced and reliable warnings, all airport partners have adequate time to

re-plan/re-schedule their resources and operations, in a way that minimises the impact

of the delay.

■ One of the main objectives of Airport CDM – predictability of operations – is demonstrated

in the best possible way.

A1-34


Overview

The comparison of Airport CDM data obtained

from a CDM Tool with the CFMU data is

focused on departing flights.

The overall objective is to avoid delays by

identifying probable delays early, so corrective

actions can be taken.

A CDM Tool can provide a system of warnings

that identify such situations.

For this study, the CDM Tool time of first

warning (TFW) will be compared with the time of

Delay Messages (TDLA) received by the CFMU.

Comparison of TFW with DLAmessages

For comparing with the CDM TFW, the following

procedure was used:

1. Identify DLA messages

2. Join these with the CDM Tool data

3. Using the AOBT provided by CDM Tool,

keep only those messages for which the

messages time is prior to off-block.

Delay messages after departure are

not relevant.

4. Group messages by relevant flight. If

multiple flight plans submitted for a

flight, use the relevant one.

5. Compare the DLA message time with

TFW for each flight.

Input Data elements used:

All flights with at least one DLA msg. and a CDM Warning

Process For each and every flight:

■ Calculate DT = TDLA - TFW (horizontal axis)

■ Calculate Actual Delay (= AOBT – SOBT) in minutes (vertical axis)

■ Plot one dot for each flight

Output Example – Figure 16

� Co m p a r i s o n b e t we e n C F M U a n d l o c a l d a t a

A1-35

CDM First Warning,DLA Time Generation

Percentage comparison

Example - Figure 16:

Comparison of TDLA and TFW

The CDM Tool warnings were produced earlier

than the time the DLA message was received by

the CFMU for 71.9 % of the flights.

Comparison of Delayed flightswith no DLA message

In real life, a number of flights are delayed, but

have no associated DLA message.

Example - Table 13 depicts the number of

delayed flights without DLA messages and those

with a CDM Warning (TFW).

Example - Table 13:

Percentage of delayed flights without a

DLA msg. & Percentage of delayed flights

with a CDM Warning

Actual Delay (min)

% DelayedFlights without

DLA msg.

% DelayedFlights with

a CDM Warning

CDM TOOL CFMU CDM TOOL

> 10 53.9 82.3

> 15 44.7 73.7

> 25 28.2 84.5

> 60 12.5 84.7

TFW

before TDLA

71.9%

TFW

after TDLA

28.1%

A1-36


�

Percent no DLA message with TFW

No DLA28.2%

Percent CDM with TFW

TFW

84.5%

Example - Figure from Table 13:Proportion of delayed flights without a DLA message is 28.2% (left)

Proportion of delayed flights with a CDM first warning is 84.5% (right)

Conclusions from the sample study

■ In 71.9% of the cases, the CDM Tool warning values were produced earlier than the time the

DLA message was received.

■ Many flights were actually delayed without an associated DLA message being sent.

A significant percentage of such flights were identified early by the local CDM Tool.

■ The CDM Tool issued an advance warning for 72% of the flights that eventually departed

outside their CTOT window.

A2-1

AT TAC H M E N T 2 PROCEDURES

The following are generic Airport CDM implementation procedures that are based upon experience

gained during the CDM airport trials. The procedures do not necessarily have to be implemented

exactly as described at every airport but they are meant as a guide and they can be adapted to meet

specific operational requirements or situations.

2 .1 GENERIC AIRPORT CDM IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES

INTRODUCTION

Milestone 1Flight PlanActivation

Milestone 2CTOTAllocation

Milestone 3Take offfrom outstation

Milestone 4 & 5Destination FIRentry / Local ATC & Final approach

Milestone 6Landing

Airport

Check FPL againstAirport slot. Ensure registration is avai-lable in order tocreate link to adeparture. If there isany discrepancy analarm is raised andthe AO is contacted. Note: An E-DPI maybe sent when the FPLand Airport Slot datacorrespond.

Stand and Gate Mgtcan use updated EIBT toreview planning.

Ensure final stand allocated 20 minutes prior toELDT

AO

Ensure airport slotis availableSubmission of FPL. Reaction to analarm concerninga discrepancy in data.

Monitor TOBT andconsider options ifit is greater thanEOBT

Monitor TOBT andconsider options ifit is greater thanEOBT

GH

No action(unless delegation ofresponsibilityhas been madeby AO)

Review standand EIBT forallocation ofresources

Review standand EIBT forallocation ofresources

CFMU

Issue orupdate CTOTif required

Send FUMwith ATCActivatedstatus

ATC

No action

Provide more accurateELDT

ProvideaccurateALDT

� A r r i va l s

Action - ResponsibilityEvent

A2-2

AT TAC H M E N T 2 PROCEDURES (CONT ’D)

Milestone 7In-block

Milestone 8Ground handling starts

Milestone 9Final update ofTOBT

Milestone 10ATC issues TSAT

Milestone 11Boarding starts

Milestone 12Aircraft ready

Milestone 13Start up request

Milestone 14Start up approved

Airport

Stand and Gate Mgt can use TSAT to review planning

An alarm will normally be generated if boarding is late.

FLT/ Crew

Request start up at TSAT

AO/GH

AO/GH review turn-roundoperation

If flight is the first of theday or has been longterm parked, GH willinput AGHT

Between AIBT and Xminutes before off block,update the TOBT. At thispoint a T-DPI(C) will besent

AO/GH will inform Flightcrew (unless the TSAT has been part of a datalink clearance)

Ensure that Boardingstarts in sufficient time to meet TOBT.

CFMU

Update CTOT ifrequired

ATC

Issue a TSATbased upon the pre-departuresequence and CTOT compliance

ATC approvestart up at TSAT

� Tu r n - R o u n d


A2-3

Milestone 15Off-block

Milestone 16Take off

Airport

The A-DPI will be sent at TSAT

AO GH CFMU

CFMU will freezethe CTOT

FUM sent withATC Activatedstatus to ADES

ATC

Establish the finaldeparture sequenceprior to take off

FSA sent to CFMU

� D e p a r t u r e


A2-4

AT TAC H M E N T 2 PROCEDURES (CONT ’D)

Airp

ort

Op

erator

Aircraft

Op

erator

Gro

un

dH

and

ler

ATC

CFM

U

Milesto

nes

Milestone 1Flight PlanActivation

Milestone 2CFMU SlotAllocation

Milestone 3ATOT fromDepartureAerodrome

Milestone 4 & 5FIR Entry (or specifictime/point beforelanding a FinalApproach

Milestone 6Landing

Milestone 7In-block

Milestone 8Ground HandlingStarts

Milestone 9Final Updateof TOBT

Milestone 10ATC IssuesTSAT

Milestone 11Boarding Starts

Milestone 12Aircraft Ready

Milestone 13Start Up Request

Milestone 14Start Up Approved

Milestone 15Off-Block

Milestone 16Take off

Check FPL against Airport slot.

Ensure registration is

available in order to create link to a

departure. If there is any discrepancy an alarm

is raised and the AO is

contacted. Note: An E-DPI m

ay be sent w

hen the FPL and Airport Slot data correspond.

Issue or update CTOT

if required

Stand and Gate M

gt can use updated

EIBT to review

planning.

Monitor TOBT

and consider options if it is greater than

EOBT

Review stand

and EIBT for allocation of

resources

Send FUM

with ATC

Activated status

Ensure final stand allocated

20 minutes

prior to ELDT

Monitor TOBT

and consider options if it is greater than

EOBT

Review stand

and EIBT for allocation of

resources

Provide accurate ALDT

Review

turn-round operation

Review

turn-round operation

If flight is the first of the day

or has been long term

parked, GH w

ill input AGHT

Between AIBT and X m

inutes before off

block, update the TOBT. At this point a

T-DPI(C) will

be sent

Ensure airport slot is availableSubm

issionof FPL.

Reaction to an alarm

concerning a discrepancy

in data.

No action(unless delegation

of responsibility has been m

adeby AO)

Stand and Gate

Managem

ent can use TSAT

to review

planning

inform Flight

crew (unless

the TSAT has been part of a

datalink clearance)

If the boarding is late an alarm

w

ill normally

be generated if boarding is

late.

Flight Crew

request start up at TSAT

Approve start up at TSAT

An A-DPIw

ill be sent by the system

at AOBT or a tim

e param

eter before TTOT. Establish the

final departure sequence prior

to take off

Freezethe CTOT

Send FUM w

ith AA to

destination aerodrom

e

Send FSAto CFM

U

Ensure that Boarding starts in

sufficient tim

e to m

eet TOBT.

Issue a TSAT based upon

the pre-departure sequence and

CTOT com

pliance

A3-1

This document provides recommended generic elements that could be included in aMemorandum of Understanding (MoU) and Confidentiality Agreements at local airport level.Such agreements would be beneficial prior to the commencement of any Airport CollaborativeDecision Making (CDM) implementation, in order to safeguard the sharing of data.

Safeguard Data Sharing

Recommended � Parties entering into data sharing activities formalise written agreements to safeguard their own

interests� All parties must always class data as commercially sensitive to its respective owner� It must also be clear that any confidential data obtained during the programme will remain

subject to the terms of the agreement in perpetuity� No data can be disclosed to any third party

Safeguard Data Quality

Recommended� Accuracy, quality and delivery of all data must be maintained and agreed by all parties

entering into agreements

This document has limited scope with a basic description of the Airport Collaborative DecisionMaking (CDM) functional requirements for ‘Confidentiality Agreements’ to be used by AirportAuthorities, ATM, Aircraft Operators, Ground Handling and other service providers.

AT TAC H M E N T 3 SAMPLE DOCUMENTS

3.1 SAMPLE AIRPORT CDM MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

3.1 .1 OVER VIE W

3.1 .3 M oU & CONFIDENTIALIT Y AGREEMENTS

W H Y

3.1 .2 SCOPE

INTROD U C T I O N

fdsfsdfsdsdfsdfs

Maintaining Stakeholder Confidence

Recommended� Parties must have clear benefits and agreed objectives for the sharing of data� Transparency between parties will safeguard confidence and guarantee long term commitment� Regular meetings should be co-ordinated between all parties to discuss achieved benefits or

losses� Sufficient flexibility to the agreements for data enhancements and / or mitigation against

shortfalls

Ownership and Leadership of Information System

Recommended� Centrally managed by a single entity� All parties from the outset must agree with whom this responsibility lies� Airport Operator, ATC, Aircraft Operator, AOC or a third party as site specific

Leadership Responsibility

Recommended� Day to day management� Configuration/de-configuration� Information system upgrades� Data sharing rules� Rules and procedure development� Co-ordination of any additional stakeholder buy in� Distribution & ownership of data (who to see, what and why)� Ensure that confidentiality is not compromised� Originators of data will normally be the sole owners of the information

W H O

A3-2

AT TAC H M E N T 3 SAMPLES DOCUMENTS (CONT ’D)

A3-3

W H AT

Financial Issues

Recommended� Must address cost� Partners will meet their own cost of participating� AOC or similar body can facilitate

Agreement Timescales

Recommended

� Duration of any agreement must be agreed from the outset

Sample Table of Contents

� Parties� Background� Purpose� Authority� Definitions� Scope� Rights and Responsibilities� Exclusion of Warranties� Limitation of Remedies� Changes and Modifications� Construction of the Agreement� Termination of the Agreement� Effective Date� Notices� Point of Contact (POC)� Signatures� Audit Requirements

G U I D E L I N E S

Based on the draft of Memorandum of Understanding being prepared in several airports,here are some guidelines to help other CDM projects to achieve such a document.

Objectives of MoU

The objectives of the MoU, which are closely related to the project objectives, must be statedvery clearly.

The main objectives are:

� To ensure technical mechanisms allowing the information sharing� To implement procedures increasing the traffic predictability� To promote the information exchange between the local CDM project and the CFMU� To set up monitoring mechanisms processing the proposals for improvements

Partners Obligations

It is very important to clarify the general obligations of all airport partners towards the project,such as:

� To ensure active participation, recognising the project leadership� To cooperate in all functional specifications� To ensure the interaction between their systems and the local CDM platform� To provide the necessary information to the platform and ensure its quality� To guarantee a representative along the different phases of the project to support and control

its development, as well as the implementation of the adopted solutions

Confidentiality Clauses

In this section of the MoU the clauses of confidentiality must be defined, according to thenational laws and regulations, in order to create a feeling of trust amongst all airport partners.

Confidentiality Clauses

The MoU must establish the validity period and describe the renewal process.

A3-4


A3-5

3.1 .4 GENERIC EXAMPLE OF AN AIRPORT CDMMEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

I n t r o d u c t i o n

Airport CDM involves a wide range of interactions between the various partners who are diversein nature, both in terms of business interests and organisational characteristics. It is essential thattheir agreement to work together for the common good is summarised in a Memorandum ofUnderstanding (MoU), to be signed and followed by all the partners.

In the following, a generic example of an Airport CDM MoU is provided which, when completedwith the site specific details, can be used by a given Airport CDM project. Use of this modelis recommended, as it contains or prompts for all the information that has been shown to beessential for the smooth operation of an Airport CDM project.

This sample is designed to provide the framework of cooperation between airport partners.Cooperation between an airport and the CFMU must also be based on an MoU, the model forwhich is available from the CFMU.

A3-6


( I N S E RT N A M E O F A I R P O RT )CO L L A B O R AT I V E D E C I S I O N M A K I N G ( C D M )M E M O R A N D U M O F U N D E R S TA N D I N G ( M O U )

Co n t e n t

1. Description of the project

2. Objectives of the MoU

3. Partners obligations

4. Organisation

5. Costs

6. Responsibilities of partners providing data

8. Confidentiality

9. Dispute resolution

9. Amendments

10. Signatures of contracting partners

A3-7

D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e p r o j e c t

Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) is a concept which aims to improve the througputof air traffic at airports. This will be achieved by providing all Contracting Partners with accurate,timely and relevant information allowing better decisions to be made.

The main aim of the project is to improve the aircraft turn-round process, ensuring the bestpossible use of airport infrastructure and resources to the benefit of all Contracting Partners.

The expected benefits include, but are not limited, to:

Airport Operator � Reduction in overall delays� More efficient use of resources� Improved passenger information� Environmental benefits� Optimum usage of infrastructure

Aircraft Operator � Increased punctuality� Early identification of problems� Improved slot allocation

Air Traffic Control � Improved departure sequence planning� Improved slot adherence

Handling Agents � Optimum use of resources

CFMU � Improved slot adherence

The project is supported by EUROCONTROL and will be based on, or be compatible with,the Airport CDM concept.

A3-8


O b j e c t i ve s o f t h e M o U

This MoU has been signed by the partners with the following primary aims:

� To create the cooperative framework to implement Airport CDM� To ensure technical mechanisms allowing common information sharing� To implement procedures to increase traffic predictability� To promote the exchange of information between the local Airport CDM project and the CFMU� To set up monitoring mechanisms in order to enable the evaluation of improvements and

proposals for further optimisation

O b l i g a t i o n s o f t h e co n t ra c t i n g p a r t n e r s

The Contracting Partners accept the following obligations:

� Ensure active participation in all levels and phases of the project as required� Support the development / validation of all functional specifications� Follow the agreed Airport CDM operational procedures and rules� To share information under the agreed conditions and to act on the shared information

A3-9

O r g a n i s a t i o n

The following project structure has been agreed:

The Steering Group will consist of representatives from the Contracting Partners. (EUROCONTROLmay be invited to participate in the Steering Group and should be invited to participate in theWorking Group.)

The Steering Group will appoint the Airport CDM Project Manager.

The Terms of Reference for the Steering Group, Working Group and Sub-Groups, as appropriate,are in Attachment XX of this MoU.

Steering Group (SG)

Airport CDM Project Manager

Working Group(s) (WG)

Sub-Group Sub-Group

A3-10

Co s t s

Costs associated with equipment or resources will be covered by the partner concerned.This will also apply to any system adaptation or integration unless otherwise agreed.

Where an interface is required between partners, each one will try to minimise the cost impact onthe other.

The provision and use of data to and by the Contracting Partners is free of charge.

Partners who are not signatories to this MoU wishing to access data may be allowed to do so withthe agreement of the Steering Group. For using data under such a special dispensation, a chargeis applicable as described in Attachment YY of this MoU. The charge can be avoided by becominga signatory of the MoU.

R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f Co n t ra c t i n g Pa r t n e r s

Pr ov i d i n g D a t a

The Contracting Partners shall:

� Enter and maintain in the Airport CDM database, the data for which they are responsible � Be responsible for the accuracy and timeliness of the data they enter and maintain in the

Airport CDM database� Participate in the CDM data monitoring by using agreed Key Performance Indicators,

performing post-operational analysis and making results available to the otherContracting Partners

� Grant other Contracting Partners access to the data contained in the Airport CDM database

The detailed arrangements for the provision of data to the Airport CDM database is the subjectof Service Level Agreements between the Contracting Partners and contained in Attachment ZZof this MoU.


A3-11

Co n f i d e n t i a l i t y

The Contracting Partners shall keep confidential all information coming to their knowledge in thecourse of Airport CDM operations relating to the business associations and transactions of theother partners including technical or commercial arrangements and documents and materials apartner may acquire while working under this MoU, provided however, that this obligation on acontracting partner shall not apply to knowledge or information which is in the public domain.

Contracting Partners shall keep confidential the substance of any report, test, recommendation,or advice which they have given to another contracting partner in connection with the AirportCDM operation.

Contracting Partners may exchange information amongst themselves on the basis of service levelagreements and with the CFMU on the basis of agreements concluded on their behalf by (entername of appointed representative).

(Section to be completed with provisions required / agreed locally)

D i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n

(Section to be completed with provisions appropriate locally)

A m e n d m e n t s

Amendment proposals to this MoU, including termination, must be submitted in writing to theSteering Group which will handle such proposals in accordance with the process described in itsTerms of Reference.

A3-12


S i g n a t u r e s o f Co n t ra c t i n g Pa r t n e r s

The contracting partners hereby agree that this Memorandum of Understanding shall be

effective from (date).

Signatures

A3-13

AT TAC H M E N T 3 SAMPLE DOCUMENTS

The Airport CDM Implementation Inventory & Compliance Checklist is a quick reference matrix, based

on the Implementation Manual.

Its purpose is to describe as accurately as possible the data available per airport partner, indicate pos-

sible accuracy variations and identify areas with room for improvement. The table contains the data

fields listed in the Airport CDM Implementation Manual and forms a kind of "Inventory".

Each local airport partner completes the corresponding column, indicating

with YES or NO if a specific Data Item is available in their operational system in

use and if it is actually required for their operation.

The column “Available in airport”, indicates with YES whenever at least one airport partner has the spe-

cific Data Item available. When Airport CDM Information Sharing is implemented, the available Data

Items will be shared amongst all airport partners.

This Checklist is accompanied with a list of recommendations on how to obtain the Data Items current-

ly not available but REQUIRED for local Airport CDM implementation.

The Sample Inventory & Compliance Checklist from Budapest Ferihegy airport is an exact copy

of the one appearing in the local Airport CDM Project Report and contains local systems and

terminology.

3 .2 AIRPORT CDM IMPLEMENTATIONINVENTORY & COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST

3.2 .1 INTRODUCTION

(available)

(required)

A3-14


3 .2 .2 INVENTORY & COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST ACCORDING TO AIRPORT CDM IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL

Data Item

A/cRegistration

A/c Type

GroundHandlingAgent

A/c ParkingStand

MTTT

TOBT

A/c Status

Flight Type

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

ATC Airport Airline

Common for ARR & DEP flights

GH Availablein XXX

For CDM Remarks

A3-15

Data Item

ICAOcallsign

IATAcallsign

ADEP

ELDT

ALDT

EIBT

AIBT

EET

Airborne Time (fromoutstation)

Landingtime

In-blocktime

VariableTaxi-in Time(EXIT)

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

ATC Airport Airline

ARR flights

GH Availablein XXX

For CDM Remarks

A3-16


Data Item

ICAOcallsign

IATAcallsign

ADES

SOBT

AOBT

EOBT

ETOTATOTCTOT

SID

BoardingGate

Off-blocktime

VariableTaxi-out Time(EXOT)

Take offTime

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

DESIRABLE

REQUIREDREQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIREDREQUIREDREQUIRED

ATC Airport Airline

DEP flights

GH Availablein XXX

For CDM Remarks

A3-17

Alarms / Warnings

FPL Inconsistency

Airborne(from outstation)

MTTT

EOBT inconsistency

CTOT inconsistency

Boarding

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

Available inXXX

For CDM Remarks

A3-18


Milestones

FPL submission Airport CDM Information Sharing

Airport CDM Information Sharing

Airport CDM Information SharingTurn-Round Process








Airport CDM Information SharingTurn-Round process

Variable Taxi Time Calculation


Collaborative Management of Flight Updates


Variable Taxi Time Calculation Collaborative Management of Flight Updates


Variable Taxi Time CalculationCollaborative Management of Flight Updates





CTOT allocation

ATOT - oustation

FIR entry

Final

ALDT

AIBT

AGHT (start)

TOBT (final)

TSAT (by ATC)

Start Boarding

ARDT

ASRT(start up request)

ASAT(start up approval)

AOBT

ATOT

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

Available inAirport

For CDM Prerequisite for:

A3-19

Data Item

A/cRegistration

A/c Type

GroundHandlingAgent

BoardingGate

A/c Stand

STTT

TOBT

A/c Status

Schengen

REQUIREDYESYESYESYESin FIDS

YESif AO provide it, in

the FPL and on strip

REQUIREDYESYESYESYES

in FIDS, FCS andFDPS

YESin the FPL and

on strip

YESYESYESYES

in FIDS colour coded(also complete set

of data - e.g. fuel comp.)

NO

YESYESYESYES

in FIDS(also gate status)

NO

YESYESYES(MAH manages T2A)

YESin FIDS

YES(both ARR and DEP)

YESYES(in relevant SOP)

YESNONO

NONONONONO

YES(YES)

(FIDS statusdefinition - Not asdefined by CDM)

(YES)(FIDS status

definition - Not asdefined by CDM)

(YES)(FIDS status

definition - Not asdefined by CDM)

(YES)(MATIAS status

definition, i.e. STU,TAXI, CNL STU, ARR

(manual click),DEP (autom.)- Not as

defined by CDM)

DESIRABLE

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

Location of stand(or group of stands)also vital for VariableTaxi Time calculation

According toCDM concept

VITALFOR CDM

IMPLEMENTATION

NOT APPLICABLEFOR THE TIME BEING

NA

ATC Airport Ops Airline

Common for ARR & DEP flights

GH Availablein BUD

For CDM(AODB)

Remarks

3.2 .3 SAMPLE INVENTORY & COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST FROM BUDAPEST FERIHEGY AIRPORT

A3-20


Data Item

ICAO callsign

IATA callsign

In-block time

Taxi-in time

ADEP

EET

Departuretimeat origin

Landingtime

ELDT

EIBT

ALDT

REQUIREDYESNONO

NONONONO

YESin FCS and FDPS

YES

DESIRABLEYESYESYESYESin FCS and FDPS

YESin FCS and FDPS

NO

YESYESYESYES

YESYESin FPL

YESScheduled value

YESin FPL

(YES)(only in FPL)

YESYES

AOBT & ATOT fromoutstation via

MVT msgs

YESAOBT & ATOT from

outstation viaMVT msgs

YESAOBT & ATOT from

outstation viaMVT msgs

NO

YESYESin FIDS

YESin FIDS

YESin FCS, FDPS and FIDS

YES

YESfrom ATC

(according todata exchangeMATIAS-FIDS)

from ATC(according to

data exchangeMATIAS-FIDS)

from ATC(according to

data exchangeMATIAS-FIDS)

ACT msg. in at: FIR entry - 20' incl. asystem calculated

ELDT based onthe flight profile

After a/c enters theFIR, ELDT is conti-nuously updated

by Radar

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIREDInitial ELDT can becalculated by using

the FUM and addinga local parameter

ELDT

YESYESin FIDS

YESin FIDS

YESR/T call from rampagent -> manualinput into FIDS

YESManual click ->

“park” -> end of FPLREQUIRED

ACCURACY COULDIMPROVE

- Ideally registeredautomatically by

A-SMGCS

YESfrom ATC (MATIAS)Manual click from ATC (MATIAS) from ATC (MATIAS) REQUIRED

REQUIREDNO

NONONONO REQUIRED VTT introductionNO

Ideally registeredautomatically by

A-SMGCS


ARR flights

GH Availablein BUD

For CDM(AODB)

Remarks

A3-21

Data Item

ICAO callsign

IATA callsign

Taxi-out time

ADES

SID

BoardingGate

Off-block time

Take off time

SOBT

REQUIREDYESNONOYESin FCS and FDPS

YES

DESIRABLEYESYESin FIDS

YESin FIDS

YESin FCS and FDPS

YESin FCS and FDPS

NO

YESYESin FIDS

YESin FIDS

YES

YESNONONOYESIn e-flight list

YESYESin FIDS

YESin FIDS

YESIn FIDS

(also gate status)NO

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

YESNONOYESYES10 minutes default

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

YESYES

In FIDSand chg from

MVT msg

YESIn FIDS

and chg fromMVT msg

YESIn FIDS

and chg fromMVT msg.

NO REQUIRED

ETOT YESNONONOYES

ETOT (at atco list) =EOBT (FPL) +default value

REQUIRED

ATOT YESYESIn FIDS

YESIn FIDS

YESFrom ATC

YES(system derived -when radar & FPL

coupled)

REQUIRED

EOBT YESYES

In FIDSand chg from

MVT msg

YESIn FIDS

and chg fromMVT msg

YESIn FIDS

and chg fromMVT msg.

YESfrom FPL

IMPROVESWITH TOBT

IMPLEMENTATION

ACCURACY COULDIMPROVE with

VTT introduction

ACCURATE with automatic

registration

CTOT YESYESYES

Both via SITA andin CFMU terminal

(YES)only in the separate

VFMU terminalYES REQUIRED

REQUIRED

AOBT YESYES

R/T call from rampagent -> manualinput into FIDS

YESIn FIDS

YESIn FIDS

NOOnly Manual click at

start-up clearance(STU) and (start)

taxi clearance (TAXI)

REQUIREDACCURACY COULD

IMPROVE- Ideally registeredautomatically by

A-SMGCS


DEP flights

GH Availablein BUD

For CDM(AODB)

Remarks

A3-22


Alarms / Warnings

Boarding

Airborne(from outstation)

MTTT

FPL inconsistency

CTOT inconsistency

EOBT inconsistency

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Available inBUD

For CDM(AODB)

Remarks

A3-23

Milestones



Airport CDM Information SharingTurn-round process





Variable Taxi Time Calculation



Collaborative Management of flight updates

FPL submission

CTOT allocation

ATOT - outstation

FIR entry

Final

ALDT

AIBT

AGHT (start)

TOBT (final)

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

REQUIRED

DESIRABLE

REQUIRED

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

YES

YES

Airport CDM Information SharingTurn-round processStart Boarding REQUIREDNO

NO

Airport CDM Information SharingTurn-round processTSAT (by ATC) REQUIREDNO

Airport CDM Information SharingTurn-round processASAT (Start up approval) REQUIREDYES

NO


Variable Taxi Time CalculationCollaborative Management of flight updates

ARDT REQUIREDNO



ASRT (Start up request) REQUIREDNO



AOBT REQUIREDYES



ATOT REQUIREDYES

Availablein BUD

For CDM(AODB) Prerequisite for:

Intentionally left blank

A4-1

R e f e r e n ce s

Airport CDM Operational Concept Document, Edition 3.0, September 2006, EUROCONTROL – DAP/AOE/CDM/05/04/05-1– Also available for download

Airport CDM Functional Requirements Document, Edition 3.0, September 2006, EUROCONTROL – DAP/AOE/CDM/05/04/05-2– Also available for download

The European CDM Portal on the Internet: http://www.euro-cdm.org

Airport CDM Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) - September 2005EUROCONTROL - EEC Note No. 18/05 - Also available for download

Airport Operations Programme (APR), Overall Assessment at the ECAC level, Version 0.7, 15 July 2003, Icon

Athens Airport CDM Data Analysis during the 2004 Olympic Games - November 2005Also available for download

EUROCAE WG 69 - Collaborative Decision Making - MASPS

A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge - PMI, 2000 edition

AT TAC H M E N T 4 LIST OF REFERENCES AND CONTACTS

INTROD U C T I O N

fdsfsdfsdsdfsdfs

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to all partners from the CDM trial Airports and to the Airport CDMTask Force Members for their contribution and support to the completion of thisImplementation Manual.

For further information, contact:

Airport CDM Project Manager Elisabeth LagiosAirport Operations Programme (APR)Airport Operations and Environment Division (AOE)

EUROCONTROLRue de la Fusée, 96B-1130 BrusselsBelgiumTel.: +32 2 729 3390Fax: +32 2 729 9193E-mail: [email protected]

A4-2

AT TAC H M E N T 4 LIST OF REFERENCES AND CONTACTS

A5-0

AT TAC H M E N T 5 RAISING LOCALAIRPORT CDM AWARENESS

ATTACHMENT 5: Raising Local Airport CDM Awareness A5-0

ATTACHMENT 5.1 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from Barcelona Airport A5-1

ATTACHMENT 5.2 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from Brussels Airport A5-3

ATTACHMENT 5.3 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from London (LHR) Airport A5-5

ATTACHMENT 5.4 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from Munich Airport A5-7

ATTACHMENT 5.5 Sample Airport CDM Information Sheet from Stockholm Airport A5-9

Intentionally left blank

A5-11

Section will be added at a later stage